>>>>> "Matthias" == Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org> writes:
Matthias> Maybe you should be more specific about "those who can't Matthias> use" uncompressed debug info in the first place. So, you've argued that the disk savings are not significant inside a package, because packages are themselves compressed. What people are arguing is that they want to have debug info for large programs like firefox or chromium installed, or really debug info for large parts of their system. They are in effect arguing that they care about the installed size not the package size. They have explicitly argued that having to uninstall and then later reinstall disadvantages their debug cycle. This situation is particularly unfortunate because it sounds like we have a conflict between two techniques for saving space. On one hand we have dwz which tries to optimize and reduce overall size of debug symbols which is incompatible (apparently--no one has explicitly confirmed this) compressed debug symbols. Presumably we can still run dwz within a single package by doing so before debug symbols are compressed. But presumably this gets in the way of people running dwz themselves or something. I'll be blunt. The people who say that they want debug symbols installed on their system have made a simple, easy to understand argument. The argument that compressed debug symbols break things is still porrly stated. We've had a claim that dwz might not work with compressed debug symbols (and didn't used to). We've had no one explain how that creates a problem in practice or even confirm it's still the case. It felt like pulling teeth to even get an answer that might be a tool we care about. Please be less vague! --Sam